Splenda - Here We Go Again

<<< Back to main page

"We've done a great job of redefining sweetness, and it's great to see it pay off," says Anne Rewey, Splenda marketing director for Ft. Washington, Pennsylvania-based McNeil Corp. "We're committed to the leadership position in this market."

Sucralose (Splenda�) is a chlorocarbon and is more accurately compared to ingesting tiny amounts of chlorinated pesticides. The chlorocarbons have long been known for causing organ, genetic, and reproductive damage. It should be no surprise then, that the testing of sucralose reveals it causes up to 40% shrinkage of the thymus: a gland that is the very foundation of our immune system. Sucralose also causes swelling of the liver and kidneys, calcification of the kidney, fertility issues in male rates, and gastrointestinal problems in pregnant rats. If you experience kidney pain, cramping, swelling, an irritated bladder, or blood in your urine after using sucralose in Splenda, stop use immediately.

Sucralose (trichlorogalactosucrose) was approved by the FDA in 1988 as a tabletop sweetener and for use in a number of desserts, confections, and nonalcoholic beverages. Splenda is approximately 600 times sweeter than sugar. But the sweetness is forced, not like a natural sugar the body uses for fuel. People forget that sweetness is a by-product of foods; a bonus so to say. Forced sweetness, revved-up sweetness, and 'super-sized' artificial sweetness - all altered foods - are a trap for people to get addicted to sweeter tastes. People with eating disorders, children who are just learning about food, and those with illnesses are being sold yet another 'bill of rubbish.'

I took the following information directly from a statement from the manufacturer of Splenda:

'Sucralose is made from sugar, but is derived from sucrose (sugar) through a process that selectively substitutes three atoms of chlorine for three hydrogen-oxygen groups on the sucrose molecule. No artificial sweetener made in the laboratory is going to be neither natural to the body nor safer than unprocessed sugar', they claim.

Corporate researchers also claim that the chlorine atoms in Splenda have been altered to be so tightly bound, they create a molecular structure that is exceptionally stable under extreme pH and temperature conditions.

I do not agree that the presence of chlorine is safe in any form, and feel this "concept" of altering foods is dangerous to human health any way you slice it.

The corporations say sucralose is safe. They said the same thing about aspartame, and look at the rampant disease and obesity taking over America since aspartame was put into the food supply over twenty years ago.

Over the past twenty years of aspartame research, I have learned to value independent research results above those that are funded by the corporations. If you had the luxury of selecting which research results to submit as final payment for your laboratory study, would you submit the good or the bad results? Aspartame research is the symbol of proof this predicament exists today, and history appears to be repeating itself with Splenda.

Any animal that eats chlorine (especially on a regular basis) is at risk of cancer. The Merck Manuel and OSHA 40 SARA 120 Hazardous Waste Handbook states that chlorine is a carcinogen and emergency procedures should be taken when exposed via swallowing, inhaling, or through the skin. Currently, the safety of chlorine added to our public water supply is questioned as a cause of cancer. Now chlorine is being marketed to children in diet colas, sweetener packets, ice creams, yogurts, processed foods, gums, candies, and mints.

It is important to remember that an individual's reaction to sucralose, as with aspartame, depends upon how much is used and how often. Age, present and past health status, overall dietary habits, and the degree of other toxins present inside the body also influence individual health responses to toxic chemicals in foods.

Corporate researchers claim sucralose has been thoroughly tested. Actually they have stated that sucralose is the most tested food additive in history. I quote, "...more than 100 studies on the safety of sucralose designed to meet the highest scientific standards have been conducted and evaluated over the course of 20 years."

They stated, verbatim, the same thing about aspartame. Consumers are witnessing the same state of affairs in many ways. As with NutraSweet - no human studies were done, corporate pay rolled researchers were responsible for the results submitted to the FDA, to the media, and to AMA journals, only selective research results were reproduced, millions of dollars have been spent on advertising, and the lack of 'government involvement' is clearly documented amid the thousands of consumer complaints.

I don't drink from my swimming pool, fish tank, or public tap. Do you?

Back to top